| Term |
Author |
Discussants |
|
| aufheben |
Hoffmann Bert |
|
|
|
One of the classics of "Les Intraduisibles": Hegel's 3-fold meaning of the term "aufheben" so central to his dialectic scheme of thesis, anti-thesis, and synthesis:
a) aufheben as "abolishing" (?beseitigen?)
b) aufheben as "preserving" (?bewahren?)
c) aufheben as "lifting up" (?hinaufheben?)
Thesis and anti-thesis are "aufgehoben" in the synthesis, that is: each of them is abolished as such in the course of the process; the synthesis preserves something of both; and it lifts them up on a higher level (of historical development etc.). Maybe not "intranslatable" but you do need a whole paragraph of explanation for what a single verb achieved to say.
|
| entmuendigen, Entmuendigung |
Frank Volker |
|
|
|
Entmuendigen: to derive someone of the ability, opportunity, or perhaps even right, to speak for him/heself, or themselves. In this sense, Philippe Schmitter's concept of corporatism is the "top down" perspective, whereas from the viewpoint of those "below" (e.g. classes, groups, unions, etc.) "Entmuendigung" i.e their inability to speak for themselves, is the learned condition.
|
| Gerichtsbarkeit |
Schedler Andreas |
|
|
|
English language knows just one word for two abstract ideas: the word "justice" stands for Gerechtigkeit (justice) and Gerichtsbarkeit (the administration of justice). As strange as it may sound, but a "justice system" is not the same as a Justizsystem. The denotation is the same (the slices of reality those terms refer to) but their connotation is different. The former is less technical than the latter. It carries the assumption of justice to be done, rather than just laws to be administered.
|
| Politik |
Hoffmann Bert |
|
|
|
If for German it is a problem that the term "Politik" doesn't distinguish between politics, policy, and polity - then why isn't there a reversed problem for English not to have a word encompassing these three dimensions in one term? Or is there? In German, political science is the study of "Politik" in all three dimensions ("Politikwissenschaft"); is political science in English correctly the "study of politics"? Doesn't this unduly exclude or at least downplay the role of policy and polity? After all, isn't it somehow suspicious that English takes refuge in an adjective - political - to denote the subject this discipline is about... (see also entry for "Politologie")
|
| Politologie |
Schedler Andreas |
|
|
|
Politologie (literally, politology) names our discipline, the study of politics, in a more precise way than the misnomer political science. We are not politicizing science, after all, but trying to find out something about politics in a systematic and detached way, subject to the rules of argument and intersubjective justification. It might be appropriate to create this neologism for our own discipline: politology, the logic of politics. It would be an exact analogue to the names other disciplines bear, such as psychology, archeology, or sociology.
|
| unfrei |
Schedler Andreas |
|
|
|
It may be a mere curiosity but the adjective "free" does not have a simple opposite in English. At first, I thought my dictionaries carried some ideological pro-freedom bias but the adjective "unfree" does not exist indeed. When we talk about political regimes, we have approximate equivalents. We may refer to authoritarian, nondemocratic, or dictatorial regimes. We may even speak, although somewhat clumsily, of "not free" regimes, as Freedom House does in its annual surveys (www.freedomhouse.org). But what about citizens who are not free? Some may be "not free" due to internal inhibitions. Theodor W. Adorno's "authoritarian characters." But others are subjected to external constraints of power and exploitation, without being authoritarian or dictatorial themselves.
|
| verstehen |
Schedler Andreas |
|
|
|
Verstehen is to understand, to comprehend. Just that. Nothing else. Despite all appearances, it is not an untranslatable term at all. US scholars tend to cite the hermeneutic tradition in German social science with a touch of condescension. The use the term verstehen without translating it. It seems to be a genuinely German word burdened with irrational connotations of subjectivity and intuition. A mystical heritage of German romanticism. It is not, however. The act of verstehen does not require different levels or kinds of human rationality and linguistic competence than the (apparently more simple) act of understanding something or somebody.
|
| Zurechnungsfaehigkeit |
Schedler Andreas |
|
|
|
The concept of Zurechnungsfaehigkeit implies agency (Handlungsfaehigkeit) and responsiblity (Verantwortungsfaehigkeit). It assumes an agent to whom we may attribute the responsibility for what she says and does. Juergen Habermas takes it as a presupposition of rationality. Without responsible agents, no rationality.
|
back
top